St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-01-09
THE HOUSE.
Debate on the proposition to N ect
Public Building at Charleston


Debate on the proposition to N ect
a Public Building at Charleston
The Navy.
WASHINGTON, Jan. S.-Mr. Haley,
Idaho, from the committee on Indian affairs,
:eported bill for the purchase of tract OF
and near Salem, Ore, for the use of the
indian training school. Committee Of the
whole. Mr.. Dibble, South Carolina, from
he committee OH public buildings and
groun DIS, reported back senate bills author
.zing the construction of public building
1T Houston, Tex, and changing the limit
of appropriation Uf the public building at
Denver. Col. Committee of the whole.
Mr.. Cox. New York. from the committee
On civil service reform, reported back the
senate bill repeating the tenure of office act.
Calendar. Morrow, California, presented
petition of the chamber of commerce of
Eureka, Cal, asking for an appropriation
Of $500, 600 to improve the channel of
Humboldt bay. Referred. The house then
n the morning hour went into committee
Df the whole, Mr.. Cox, of New York,
in the chair, for consideration OF bills re-
ported from the committee on public build
lngs and grounds. The first bill called up
was that appropriating 100000 for the
purchase of a site and the erection of pub
lie building at Charleston, S.. c., and
authorizing the sale of the present postof-
fee building in that city. Mr.. Hepburn.
Iowa, opposed the bill. The city of
Charleston had been the scene of terrible
calamity, which rendered it unwise that
the government should erect a new build
ing at that place at the cost Of half million
of dollars. There was
NO PERMANENT STRUCTURE
there which had not been seriously injured,
and well nigh destroyed. The vbra-
tions were continuing, and in the face of
that fact it did not seem wise to make this
approprat Oh at the present time. Nor
did he think that the business of the city
justified it. Mr.. Hepburn moved to reduce
the appropriation to 5000, 900. Lost. On
a motion by Mr.. Dbble, South Carolina,
to limit debate, Mr.. Hepburn raised the
point of no quorum, and the morning hour
having expired in an unsuccessful attempt
to secure quorum, the committee rose,
and the bill went over without action.
The house then, yeas Isl, nays SO, went
into committee of the whole. Mr.. Springer,
of Illinois. in the chair, on the bill conSol-
idating certain bureaus of the navy depart
ment. Mr.. Golf. of West Virginia, said
that the organization of the navy depart
ment was on trial to-day, an organization
which had existed from 1912 down to the
PIT SAnt time, and which the secretary of
the navy said was vicious and ought to be
abolished. A system he submitted which
had wrought the great results which the
present system had was not and could not
be vicious. Still, it was to be tried. The
secretary was the prosecutor, the congress
was the jury. and it was asked to condemn
without a single reason being given to show
wherein tlIp system tvaS viz ba mir ni,,,
that the bill would promote economy was
A FALSE CLAIM.
Instead of reducing the number of bu-
reau officers to five, the bill really increased
it to twelve. He then proceeded to criti-
cize what he regarded as the most object
ionable features OF the measure. dwelling
especially upon the failure to provide that
the heads OF the bureauS-with the eycep-
ton of the bureau of material construction
and repair, should have any special fitness
for the duties assigned to them The pres.
ident had called the navy shabby orna-
ment." The secretary of the navy had de-
clared that its organization was vicious.
and vet. after months of study and analy-
sis. the committee on naval affairs had
brought forward bill which gave the old
system over again. There was change
only i'm name. Mr.. Buck, of Connecticut
strongly advocated the bill. He would
vote for any beneficial measure, whether il
was proposed by Democrat or Republic
can. He might add that after Republican
secretaries of the navy had for years rec.
commended just this legislation, the gentle
men from Maine and West Virginia (Messrs
Boutelle and Goff), said: I'VE must moi
do it now," because Democratic secretary
recommended it. These gentlemen seemed
to be in favor of the Republican side flon.
Hing because the Democratic side
HAD BEEN FLoPPING.
Mr.. Boutelle-Have you any foundation fol
saving or iutimating that the gentleman from
West Virginia and myself at any time, any
where, favored any such measure as this. de
stroying the function OF the navy department